Up to this day, it is still hard for many to understand the role of the Red Army in Estonia: was it the liberator or the occupant? In some East European countries the Red Army merely replaced the Nazi tyranny with the communist one. In Estonia, however, after entering the country’s territory and taking its capital with no resistance from the German forces, it suppressed an attempt to restore Estonian independence. Since Finland had already withdrawn from the war, the German front in Latvia had broke down and the Red Army had reached the Baltic Sea, the German troops in Estonia were effectively cut off of their rear. On 16 September 1944 Hitler decided to leave the continental part of Estonia. In the capital city of Tallinn, Estonians exchanged fire with the retreating German troops and raised the Estonian banner on the government building. Estonian patriots thwarted German attempts to blow up industrial sites in Tallinn; it was only the sea port that was badly destroyed. A cabinet of ministers formed by the National Committee of the Republic of Estonia had begun taking control over the country. All heavy weapons, however, had been either taken away or destroyed by the Germans. With small arms only, it was impossible for Estonians to prevent the Red Army from seizing the country.
Having occupied Estonia, the Soviets launched a war against monuments. The number of destroyed monuments to Liberation War (1918-1920) alone reached around 140. Many monuments to public statesmen and cultural figures were pulled down as well. In Tallinn alone, three cemeteries were demolished. Soviet vandalism provoked quite an understandable reaction from Estonians. In some cases people destroyed monuments to Red Army men. In the centre of Tallinn, for example, a group of schoolgirls blew up a monument on the night before its official opening. Schoolchildren in the town of Tartu did the same.
Today, a sense of inferiority is rather widely spread among the Russian economic refugee population who had moved to Estonia in search of better life during the Soviet occupation. Sadly, a mind distorted by slavery would humbly submit to tyranny but if there is no coercion it starts boasting of feigned bravery.
In 1947, a monument to Red Army men with a bronze sculpture of a soldier was established in the centre of Tallinn. Decades later it gradually became a place of assembly not only for Soviet war veterans: political meetings and demonstrations were now held there by those bemoaning the collapse of Soviet Union and deploring the restoration of Estonian independence. This crowned in 2006 with an open conflict, and a year later with a riot and pogrom. Both events were actually provoked by the actions or, more precisely, inaction of the authorities. On 9 May 2006, there were two rallies registered for that day in Tallinn: one by advocates, and the other one by opponents of the Soviet occupation incarnated in the ‘bronze soldier’. Although the former rally had to end half an hour before the beginning of the latter one, its participants did not disperse. When two men approached the monument holding an Estonian flag and a poster, the ‘internationalists’ tried to pull the poster and the flag from their hands. The poster had an inscription: ‘Estonians, remember that this soldier occupied our country and deported our people!’ The Estonian police, instead of calling patriots of the former USSR to order, carried away those who wanted to approach the bronze soldier in the time allowed for their rally. The ‘imper-Nazis’ (as Soviet-minded Russian ‘internationalists’ are nicknamed by Estonians) thus realized that they can get away with breaking public order. They plucked courage and a year later made a pogrom in the city.
On 26 April 2007, additional 600 police forces were brought to Tallinn from other localities. However, instead of taking actions when vandals started throwing stones and bottles, the policemen behaved like models demonstrating police uniform at a fashion show, obviously at the instructions of superiors. Rioters began raiding and plundering shops. The total damage caused by looting was around 100 millions Estonian kroons or about $8.7 million. The police turned active on the next day only. Prime Minister of Estonia Mr. Andrus Ansip, too, decided now to demonstrate his being a firm statesman and said that all rioters would be punished and the monument would be transferred to the Military Cemetery.
Finally, the monument was transferred and Red Army men buried near it reintered in Military Cemetery. A few days later, a delegation of the Russian Duma visited Tallinn to make sure the monument was not cut in parts during replacement. Immediately after stepping from the plane, the head of the Russian delegation declared that Estonian Prime Minister Ansip must resign. Quite naturally, his statement raised Ansip’s prestige. Had the Russians really wanted Ansip to resign, they would not declare it openly but make preparations behind closed doors like in 1940. The point is that there are many former communists who have clothed in a toga of patriots after the U.S.S.R. collapsed, pretending they had always been supporting Estonia’s independence, and A. Ansip is one of them.
During the riot, a young Russian guy was fatally stabbed with a knife. The Russian mass media lied he was killed while defending the monument. Actually, the stabbing happened near a bar looted by vandals half a mile from the monument. He is now being played off as a Russian national hero. A street in Moscow has been named after Dmitry Ganin. But why should not they, just for balance, name some streets in Moscow in honor of people killed by the communists? If there are too few streets in Moscow, some streets might be named after several persons at once. For example, ‘Marshal Tukhachevsky, marshal Yegorov, and Army Commander Kork Street’ would remind of those who died natural death of a communist: namely, shot by their party comrades. Even most ignorant people in Russia would then start asking serious questions. Why do people in Russia, a large country rich with natural resources and one of the victors in WW2, live in much worse conditions than people in those countries who lost the war and have poor natural resources like Germany, Japan and Finland? Why is the so-called ‘Russian-speaking population’, allegedly discriminated in the Baltic countries, reluctant to return to the historical homeland? Why, if some of Russian colonists are expelled from a Baltic country, they appeal to the European Court of Human Rights seeking for permission to return?
The war of monuments, started by the Soviet occupation authorities over half a century ago, has not ended with the removal of the ‘bronze soldier’. Having lost a site suitable for gatherings and provocations, admirers of the Russian empire are looking for a new place. For some time they nursed an idea of establishing, for Russian money, an equestrian statue of Peter I in the capital of Estonia and laying out a park of Peter I around it. Rejection of the proposal by the authorities would serve as a pretext for a new pogrom. In this way they hope to strengthen the ‘Russian spirit’ in Estonia. However, that is not the Russian spirit described by great Russian poet Pushkin but the aggressive imperial spirit from which the Russia’s neighbours, as well as the Russians themselves, have suffered a lot. It is the spirit of war, blood and death. Apparently, some do like it.
Tallinn, 2 May 2010
Kalju Mätik
Valeri Kalabugin
No comments:
Post a Comment